The Area described here seems to be identical (also the time scale fits at least to certain point) with the birth of y-chromosomal haplgroup N3*. Please see the study in the link:

http://www.geocities.com/grpadm/Rootsi2006.pdf

Haplogroup N3 was born in that exact area circa 11 - 14.000 ypb. Haplogroup N is closely related to Uralic speaking populations, both western siberian and northern european. Also some Turkic speakers belong to group N*. Allthough they are a clear minority amongst the N-males. Only Sakha (Yakut) males have the N-lineage as clear majority.

Sakha lineages may not be very old (still at least 1.000 years, well everything is relative..)

Most N3-males can be located in north eastern and north central europe (from Finland to east). Most belong to the so called baltic-type (or east-baltic) caucasoid subgroup.

Today there are more IE speaking N3 than there are Uralic speaking. Mostly because many russians&balts carry this genetic marker (wich they inherited from Finno-Ugrians). Also poles, germans, swedes etc have the marker from the same source.

The Water routes from the Tarim area towards europe lead to Volga/Ural-region wich is traditionaly considered to be the birth place of Uralic languages.

I would conclude that it is possible that these mummies spoke somekind of pre-Uralic language.

This is my first post to forum, I've enjoyed your interesting discussion for a while and finally desided to join.

Frequency of N* is rather low in chinese population (but diverse). I think I once saw a study about the uighurs and it concluded that they are mostly R1b. Otherwise N* is much more common is north-east europe (and west siberia).

Y-chromosome N* is also found in some brahmin groups of north-India. In low frequency though. Indian mythos tells about fair people coming from north, maybe it was these people who become the mythical "aryan", IE languages arrived India 3.500 ybp (from modern Iran), that would correlate with foundings of east-asian phenotypes at Tarim.

Maybe the newcomers drove "mummie people" out of their lands and the simultaneous arrival of two different groups gave birth to fair aryan mythos ?

Mummies also could be the "missing link" between Uralic-languages and Altaic-languages...... Since they started from Altai and ended up to Ural. If they are N*-folk.

Has anyone actually see the study by Mair ? I have tried hard to find a copy but all I can find is some obscure wikipedia articles citing "europoid" dna, whatever that is. I also found another article citing "indo-european" dna. Total bs.

I am not sure the R1b marker you mentioned belongs to the fair skin people ( Iranians,Indians, Turks of central Asia have a considerable (R2+R+R1a,b) markers). I agree with you the N marker could be related to Blond nordic Tribes, and actually the low frequency of N marker in the central asia could show that the nordics did not have a significant effect on central asian genentic.

by the way ther is noway to connect a genetic marker to a language family.

I think that finding few mumies do not give us all the information about the peopel, living in C.A. 3000 years ago.

Imho Iranians, Indians and Turks (Turkish Turks) are not fair skinned and in general so are not R1b's or R1a's.

Regulary no ydna lineage ca not be connected to any linguistic group (or racial). N-lineage makes a small differecy though. Spread of lineage N can be traced throug the spread of Uralic languages, so it seems to be the somewhat different. I dont mean that all N-males are blond&tall, N-males come in all shapes&sizes.

Central-Asian populations are genetic mix between euro/asian so I would not play out the autosomal effetc on N-males.

"The distribution of east and west Eurasian lineages through time in
the region is concordant with the available archaeological information:
prior to the thirteenth-seventh century BC, all Kazakh samples belong
to European lineages; while later an arrival of east Eurasian sequences
that coexisted with the previous west Eurasian genetic substratum can
be detected. The presence of an ancient genetic substratum of European
origin in West Asia may be related to the discovery of ancient mummies
with European features in Xinjiang"

Also the very "late" Xiongnu seems to be of Uralic origins rather than turkic.

Pulleyblank has shown that the language of the Xiongnu - of which we
possess some words and terms preserved in Chinese literature - was
related to the Siberian ethnics (Samoyeds) in the River Yennisej area

Samoyed are clearly mostly mongoloid origin (more that central-asiatics even they live closer to finno-ugrians) but hey speak samoyedic language wich is uralic (finno-ugric) in origin.

Has anyone actually see the study by Mair ? I have tried hard to find a copy but all I can find is some obscure wikipedia articles citing "europoid" dna, whatever that is. I also found another article citing "indo-european" dna. Total bs.

No, never. And this is also what I've been quite upset about these BS reports.

Alot of these initial "studies" took place in the early 20th Century some were conducted by certain European anthropologists and historians with Eurocentric views trying to spread the idea that civillisation began in Europe and the Aryans spread it all across the world.

This ofcourse led to the ideals of Nazi style philosophies, they sent Anthropologists and Historians all across Eurasia to proove that the Aryan Super Race ruled all of Eurasia.

Ofcourse these silly racist ideas were conducted by people who already had their conclusion and were merely looking for anything they could manipulate to make their theory seem a little more credible.

Its funny how some people still think, Mongoloid peoples, Chinease, Turkic etc people's stayed in their little confined space in some far away remote mountain while Europeans paraded around the globe and lived exclusively alone with their own people only.

"Even more surprisingly, the three smallest genetic distances for the 2,500-year-old Linzi population were from the Turkish, Icelander, and Finnish, rather than from the east Asian populations."

http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/17/9/1396

A DNA study in 2000 showed that as of 500 BCE, the population of Linzi may have been more closely related to modern day Europeans then to modern day East Asians, and by 1 CE, a shift towards the modern day East Asian genetic type was well under way.[1]Another study in 2003 however suggested the ancient population had
features in common with the modern populations from southern China
rather than any specific affinity to Europeans.[2]

You're wrong. A lot of yakuts/sakha have a bit of blond and wavy hair, mixed with mongoloid antropology, which is realy very strange, but seems it's not impossible. the explenation of this fact is eventualy the taking part of saka scithians in the ethnogenesis of the yakuts, and that is clear by the ethnonim. sorry about my english!

The first time the Chinese entered this region (Tarim Basin) was in the 200 BCs when Han Dynasty conquered it. There were over "100 kings", each oasis town was ruled by a king. There was no mention of the racial differences. I guess people back then were not into those kind of views.

The Y chromosome O3 marker (most common in Chinese males) is found only 10-15% in today's modern Uygurs in Xinjiang region. They are still for most part descended from local Tocharians and Sogdians.

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot create polls in this forumYou cannot vote in polls in this forum